What would happen if everyone stopped testing?

[duckme]

Just that really.
I fully understood the need for constant testing at the beginning of the pandemic. But I wonder, now that the vaccine rollout is thoroughly underway, what would happen if everyone just stopped testing.
So people who had the classic symptoms no longer tested, people no longer took lateral flow tests on a regular basis, close contacts of confirmed cases weren't encouraged to get tested, that sort of thing. People would only be tested if they were unwell enough to need medical attention.

Obviously the number of confirmed cases would drop, but since a lot of the restrictions are being eased from next week anyway, what difference will the testing make, other than to give an idea of the number of people with coronavirus at any given moment (whether they're actually unwell or not)?

I think it would be very constraining. Certainly in my family it would make it much harder to visit vulnerable elderly relatives. Every time we had a cough or sniffle we'd have to stop because we'd never know
But surely you wouldn't visit a vulnerable or CEV relative even if you did have a cough, sniffle or bug? You would still be putting them at risk?

@Oldpeoplesprinting

I’ve wondered this too. We have never tested thousands of symptomless people for illnesses before - if you went to the doctor and said you’ve got the flu, but have no symptoms at all, the doctor would tell you you DON’T have the flu, & you wouldn’t have to worry about passing it on as you don’t have it (or not in a large enough amount to affect you & therefore most likely anyone else) I know this ISN’T the flu before someone jumps on me, but the principal is similar. Maybe thousands of us have always had the flu & never knew, but as long as few people are ill from it, does it matter?

Up to 75% flu cases can be asymptomatic

www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/seasonal-influenza/facts/factsheet

It's a way of keeping numbers lower at the moment. In the last month we've had four cases at the school, three were picked up on lateral flow tests (one being a fully vaccinated staff member, one had had one vaccine, one unvaccinated child).

I think there will come a point when proactively testing the asymptotic for covid will come to an end. I don't think it will be until we get through this next wave.

Eventually I think it will be a lot like how we test and record the prevalence of flu in a year.

@Iamnotthe1

Decision makers would have little to no data to act on so their choices would be even less accurate and relevant than they are now.

Do we really want to be in the same camp as the idiot Trump who said America only had high cases because they were testing lots and so they should stop testing so they look better?

I’m not so sure decision makers would be impacted so much.

We’d still be able to do the surveys. (Just like for flu, as @NuttyinNotts points out.)

A lot of the testing data has gone direct to the media, with the effect of motivating a population into complying with measures. As a public we are not used to seeing infection numbers (as opposed to cases, and deaths).

Overall, I think we’d be better off demoting (even not reporting entirely) the daily infection count.

It would allow people to refocus on what matters.

Children would finally get an education again!

I think we’d lose valuable data on how the virus moves and mutates. As we start to learn the new relationship between infections and hospitalisation, tracking the infection rate will allow the NHS to better plan services and prepare for spikes in demand. It’s not yet as predictable as flu, although I’m sure with time it will be.

If we stopped testing we would effectively be trying to deal with the pandemic with a blindfold on. But I feel many will stop testing so let's see.

"I would love people to stop testing so that cases numbers would drop and there would be no more panic or fear. This way this country wouldn't be on the red list for so many other countries.
The other benefit would be going back to normal life."

Is this a joke?!!

1. Case numbers wouldn't drop. People would spread it even more, and symptomatic cases would jump even quicker, leading to more mutations.
2. Hospitals and medical settings wouldn't be able to prepare - they have to make adjustments to keep covid patients away from vulnerable ones. Although without testing it would kill lots of vulnerable people, so then hospitals would only be full of covid patients.
3. Other countries aren't so stupid as to say 'oh, look, the UK has no cases. Well, that's okay then!'. They'd stop all travel in and out of the UK full stop.
4. Vast numbers of people would die. Even bigger numbers of people would have long term/life-long disabilities and illnesses. You don't make this thing go away by ignoring it. It's a virus. It has one job and it doesn't care.

As a public we are not used to seeing infection numbers (as opposed to cases, and deaths)

Yeah, usually the first the public know about the intensity of an infection there is a picture of a kid sleeping on an a&e floor waiting to be seen.

There are many ways that a member of the public could keep an eye on the building stress in the NHS prior to that point but understandably most people don't feel motivated to check.

Basically, Covid would run free.

The NHS wouldn't be able to plan. There would be more transmission in the community, therefore more hospitalisations. If we have 500 people a day being admitted in hospital now, and cases are at 33,000 a day, when we hit 100,000 cases a day that would take the hospitalisation at around 1,500 people being admitted to hospital. For Covid. Again all non-urgent surgeries and treatments would have to stop (some hospitals are already on 'code black').

If you try to pretend that Covid doesn't cause health issues and hospitalisation, it won't be magicked away. It won't disappear.

The NHS wouldn't be able to plan.

Yes, they would. You'd see more calls to gps with those with symptoms, you'd see increased prevalence in serology testing, you can monitor the sewage for covid rates, you would see more people turning up at hospitals with symptoms.

Need to test to protect the elderly. As i am double vaccinated but tested positive for covid.!!

You really wonder how people think we coped all the other years before asymptomatic testing and genomic sequencing.

No they wouldn't be able to plan. Right now many hospitals are having to cancel non-emergency treatments, and they base that modeling on how many covid cases are occurring in the community, estimate how many people will need hospitalisation. They can predict how many covid admissions there will be in a few days based on how many cases there are in the community, tracked over a number of days.

So instead of 'people just turning up in hospitals with symptoms' they are now capable of estimating how many, and when they will turn up. They can give themselves a few days to sort out staffing/equipment/beds/space/oxygen.

@jessabell

Need to test to protect the elderly. As i am double vaccinated but tested positive for covid.!!

Sorry but I’m over protecting the elderly - they are vaccinated, it is what it is now.

"You really wonder how people think we coped all the other years before asymptomatic testing and genomic sequencing."

What, like in the times of Spanish Flu, when 50 million people worldwide died and a quarter of the UK population were affected?
We didn't. Or not very well.
I'd imagine the people affected back then would have desperately wanted the chance to test, to be vaccinated, to keep track of what was going on.

the bottom line is we would go back to normal a lot more bloody quickly

Except asymptomatic people are unlikely to end up in hospital so seeing numbers that thousands of cases is just misleading abd isn’t going to help them plan. In fact, it could lead to them unnecessarily cancelling surgeries etc which isn’t exactly going to help with the backlog.

"Sorry but I’m over protecting the elderly - they are vaccinated, it is what it is now."

How about protecting those who are clinically extremely vulnerable, or undergoing chemotherapy, or pregnant, or not born yet, or have some reason they can't have the vaccine or make enough antibodies? Or is it just what it is now for all of them too?

*also those who haven't even been offered a vaccine yet. How about the children who will get long covid?

Just curious for people that are against this what you think the parameters should be for stopping testing. So when do you see this happening surely it has to at some point or never?

@SonnetForSpring

If we stopped testing we would effectively be trying to deal with the pandemic with a blindfold on. But I feel many will stop testing so let's see.

iv not tested all the way through this , dd had opted out of testing , not that is stopped her education being disrupted by all the other kids who have , and im not going to ever start testing either , i think we need to be looking at death rates and hospitaliations ,rather than how many test positive surely

So

1. We wouldn’t know where cases are, especially if people are asymptomatic but are still spreading it
2. This is turn would mean far more people becoming ill and the economic issues that happen with time off work etc
3. Sequencing wouldn’t be taking place so we wouldn’t know about any new variants and therefore if they are more infectious, vaccine would or wouldn’t work etc

4 the nhs may become overwhelmed again

@covi your response is silly in my opinion, not testing isn’t going to get us off lists to enter other countries if actual cases and hospitalisations increase, or are you being stupid enough to say no testing at all, even if going into hospital and spreading it like wildfire? We will not get back to normal by not testing

@duffeldaisy

"Sorry but I’m over protecting the elderly - they are vaccinated, it is what it is now."

How about protecting those who are clinically extremely vulnerable, or undergoing chemotherapy, or pregnant, or not born yet, or have some reason they can't have the vaccine or make enough antibodies? Or is it just what it is now for all of them too?

I’m not vaccinated yet either as I’ve chosen not to yet because of breastfeeding. At the end of the day, covid isn’t going anywhere, vulnerable people will always be vulnerable to a certain extent, you cannot keep fucking over the masses. As for children and long Covid I think the education disruption and mental health crisis amongst them to be more of a threat.